Before you come in here with smart ass comments, check the OP. OK? Then if nothing else is mentioned for 3rd place, do some ****ing multiplication.

yup

yup

most definitely

for the record to say his reshove range here always beats your hand is not correct...he can profitably reshove here with KQ/KJ or otherwise worse single pair +gutters...If I have KQ in this spot I'm check/shoving and i'm check/shoving with most of my calling range knowing that doing so is massively +ev...see as many cards as you can in ICM and ABFI -- always be first in

betting the flop allows him to manipulate the icm odds whereas you can do that if you check

as played...skill level is a factor short handed so if you feel you have a skill edge you can fold if not call

this is way off dude, randoms do not check-raise worse aces on boards like this, and they certainly dont check-raise Kx. also, OP has described villain as playing solid and not getting out of line. Not to mention we're on a massive bubble thats probably worth more than this guy has ever played for, and if he loses this pot he's crippled and about to bust for nothing. I'd really be shocked if this guy was bluffing here, and he's unlikely to have anything worse for value except maybe Adxd with x<T. Brad's right that you're only beating a bluff, this is definitely a fold, although zed's point about our seat sucking is certainly valid, but not a significant enough factor given how little equity I think we have here.

there is 8400 in the prize pool and 13000 worth of seats where the **** is the overlay for 3rd

it's posted earlier in the thread for ****s sake so if you are going to be sarcastic at least try and be correct overlays in satellites are never cash

My main point is that the ranges and theory given in this thread are far too tight and flawed. The idea that villain never c/r's with a worse hand is so ludicrous. It's awful. Now this could very well be a fold, but villain has us beat x% of time and we have the best hand x% of the time but I don't think the gap between the two is far. Be careful that you don't give villain too much credit.

check flop, as played fold +1

Thx for correcting, my apologies Francis.

I think this is the most common general error on 2+2 to be honest, and I see it more in HSMTT than SSMTT. A lot of people, even good players, often make extremely broad categorical statements that a villain will NEVER make a given unusual or suboptimal play, or that their range in a given situation isalways commensurate with their actions. This is probably due to the fact that we would never be seeing this post here if hero tanked, called, and held up when villain tabled A6. Reasonable people can disagree on what the best play is here, how much equity we have against villain's range, or what have you. But saying he NEVER has hands we beat that aren't bluffs is just not reasonable IMO. I think somebody earlier said his worst possible holding here was AJ. Come on, he can't see our hole cards! To me, this massive overshove looks a lot more like a holding that has good equity against our extremely wide open-from-button-and-cbet range, but that he's not confident in playing OOP with these stack sizes. This means to me his range is mostly combo draws and weak A's.

I think a solid villain is more than capable of making this play with KT or A7o. I don't see why it's so unthinkable that he would given that IT'S THE PERFECT THING TO DO HERE BECAUSE WE'RE SUCH WEAK TIGHT ICM-LOVING VAJAYJAYS THAT MOST OF US ARE FOLDING THE BEST HAND AND SURRENDERING LIKE HALF OF OUR EQUITY IN THE TOURNEY WITHOUT A FIGHT. 2+2 often assumes that villain makes the average play, never makes a brilliant play or a colossal mistake. Experience teaches us that even good ones do, all the time. I do not think we should always be so confident in the predictability of villains in highly unusual situations like this one.

I used to disbelieve, but now I'm a believer.

what does that matter? if you want his approval so bad you should ask him yourself. and he has seen the thread fyi.

It matters to me because I'm too lazy too run numbers my self, and I trust his opinion on satties more than anyones.

I think the satty effects here are minimal due to the stacks (this is a SNAP fold against the big stack, not against this guy). What makes this hand more difficult (and why I agree with mickmack) is that villain (and this is where reads would help) should have almost none of the hands that have us in trouble in his preflop oop calling range.

The hands that have us in trouble are:

AA, KK, JJ, AK, AQ, AJ, KJ, QT, AdTd. I, being a monkey, would ship all of these except QT and maybe KJ (the rest are just instaships preflop). MAYBE the guy is getting cute with AA/KK, but regardless, that doesn't leave many combinations that have us in bad shape on this flop. On top of that, villain isn't going to overshove those hands that have us beat most of the time (KJ is the likeliest one to overshove).

I also think that villain could easily have called with crappy aces (especially Adxd) and be overshoving due to the draws. I certainly don't think this is a snap fold, and I'm not even sure if a flop check is a good idea (too many bad cards).

This, for the love of Stuey Ungar

Doesn't ICM make this a very easy fold?

I think this is basic a pretty basic SnG situation.

Shove pre (yes, I know we have 25k at 400/800). Do you really want to take a flop with these stacks at AT?

Their calling ranges are so tigh I think shoving is +EV here and the optimal play considering the sattie situation.

I don't think shoving pre is optimal at all with an M around 18, even if it is marginally +cev. I still fold flop though.

We are not that desperate at all to be getting it in here in a well behind/marginally ahead situation here. Pretty sure with ICM we should be having a lot more equity than we have to make this call.

ICM sux

I think anyone thinking villain here is flatting A7o or KTo and check/shoving on this flop in this situation are being stubborn and nitpicky. Yes, of course, it COULD happen. There is ALWAYS a chance that a particular villain in a particular hand has just decided to FU shove out of frustration, or just heard that his mom has died and needs to win or GTFO, or whatever reasons would cause a random spazz. But we can't start making decisions BASED on these "well but villain could do X here because one time I saw a guy do it or I PERSONALLY would play X like this." If you guys want to start making justifications for calls like this, go ahead. I don't think you'll like the results.

I've always said that, but this seems to be a pretty textbook case. I'm not even sure that calling here is more than marginally +cev.

Mick/Eigen/Town, you're making a good case for this being +cEV, but given eigens ranges and the payout structure, is it +$EV? If anyone has sngwiz/sngpt and knows how to use it, maybe we can get some numbers from there. It would also be nice if OP could provide more info on estimated skill edge/variance/other factors that can influence the strategic decision making.

ICM does suck but in single table tournaments or satellites where the difference between the minimum prize and bubbling is extreme it has to be the rule.

I think KTo is a lot more plausible than most of the other hands in the range someone stoved before. I don't buy him flatting and volunteering to play the pot OOP with AJ or AQ when 3betting would take down a sizable pot so often. Somebody mentioned that flatting A7o or KTo is bad here. I couldn't agree more, that's why I don't do it. But I see villains who have that kind of leak (defending their blinds wide and passively) all the time, even at hsmtt. I don't really see many hands for which villain's preflop play is something I'd endorse or recommend, I'm just thinking of what is plausible for him given his actions.

Prob here imo is that villain's play should be drastically different 3 handed than it was previously.

Fold camp: villain is a nit and his CR range demolishes us.

Call camp: **** you ICM and stove is only good for muffins.

OP: Did you notice any drastic changes in villains play style as things became short handed? Any more floats, drastically more steals, etc? Was your image loose and did you constantly cbet? If so, I'm getting it in pretty quick. Without the context in which this all happened, I think it is very hard to say.

All imo.

My contention is that ICM sucks like Newtonian physics sucks for explaining quantum mechanics. It is a tool, not THE tool, and I think ICM can fail badly even in situations that are textbook for it.

cEV matters more than you think. This is almost like a winner-take all shootout between you and villain with the CL sitting there as chaperone.

I have noticed a general thing about satellites and ICM. The guys who crush sats aren't the ones making these huge ICM folds, they're the ones ICM ****ing other guys and making them make the huge ICM folds. And because doing that is so valuable, they do what is necessary to get in a position to do it.

I don't know what he'd make of this hand, but the best satellite player I know has hardly got a damned clue what ICM is.